>>>>> "Kurt" == Kurt Starsinic <kstar@cpan.org> writes: Kurt> It seems very strange to me to say that an anonymous sub with Kurt> no private variables is "not a closure." Is not the (shorthand) Kurt> definition of a closure "a subroutine, associated with all its Kurt> bindings," even when "all" == 0? Well, we need a term for that then. I've been adovcating "closure" as when "all > 0", whether named or anonymous. But if you have a better term (that doesn't take more than three words) for the subroutines that generate a different CV when created as opposed to those that don't, I'm all for it. If "all subroutines are closures", then the term loses its usefulness within the Perl world. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!Thread Previous | Thread Next